mudlake wrote:
Yes, I think since you make more large prints than I do, you would need to use all the pixels on the camera. I don't make a lot of large prints (and many people never print -which is a shame) and the images I do print large are landscapes where I'm on a tripod and crop mode would never be used. Eighteen megapixels is plenty to print the occasional 8x12 or 20x30.
By the way, Chez, would you rather have a 35/1.8 or the Batis 40/2? I know you were looking at it a while back.
Awaiting to see what the 35 1.8 delivers. I love Batis colours and contrast.
DaveFP wrote:
I have five of the lenses on your list. None of them is the "Goldilocks" 35 we all want.
That's my whole point. There will never be a lens that meets the "just right" that people seem to want here for a 35mm. It's probably the most covered focal length yet most seem unhappy. I don't think they will ever be pleased. 😀
No we will never be pleased. We all want a 1.4 the size and weight of the 2.8 and at a low cost. NEVER will happen, so this debate the cows will come home and retire first.
I kinda given up on 35mm focal length. with the 40,45,50 out there they just seem to gap better for me. I have a 24 and 85 on either side. Right now the 45 is nice
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, you get 18.5 megapixels, but you also get a stop less dynamic range at base ISO and importantly you lose a bit over a stop of high ISO capability when the light is low. So, you have a 37mm f/2.2 lens when you crop the 24 GM, and a little over a half stop less light than a 35 f/1.8, so if the 35 f/1.8 is pretty good wide open it should have a distinct advantage not only in resolution but in the ability to shoot in low light.
Obviously we will see. But I'm not so sure it will have a "distinct" advantage in IQ since it appears it may not even be a G lens let alone GM. The 24GM will only get better for me with the next higher MP sensors. As others have mentioned 36mm at 18mp is actually pretty darn good already. I'm plenty happy to give up a half stop for the benefit of having 2 lenses in one personally
GMPhotography wrote:
No we will never be pleased. We all want a 1.4 the size and weight of the 2.8 and at a low cost. NEVER will happen, so this debate the cows will come home and retire first.
I kinda given up on 35mm focal length. with the 40,45,50 out there they just seem to gap better for me. I have a 24 and 85 on either side. Right now the 45 is nice
We need those rumored Zeiss Alon lenses to be announced
Jul 01, 2019 at 07:46 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nhsonyshooter wrote:
Obviously we will see. But I'm not so sure it will have a "distinct" advantage in IQ since it appears it may not even be a G lens let alone GM. The 24GM will only get better for me with the next higher MP sensors. As others have mentioned 36mm at 18mp is actually pretty darn good already. I'm plenty happy to give up a half stop for the benefit of having 2 lenses in one personally
Like I said above for me the issue is not resolution, it is the loss in dynamic range and particularly the loss in high ISO capability. That won't get better with the next higher MP sensors. We will of course see about the optical performance, but I would hope that this Sony 35 f/1.8 would at least compete with the Nikon 35 f/1.8S and the Canon RF 35 f/1.8 both of which are very nice lenses even though they are modestly priced. People will of course differ on whether that half stop loss in low light is something that matters for their shooting. It does for mine and it will continue to do so even with the next higher MP sensors, but YMMV and it seems it likely does.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Like I said above for me the issue is not resolution, it is the loss in dynamic range and particularly the loss in high ISO capability. That won't get better with the next higher MP sensors. We will of course see about the optical performance, but I would hope that this Sony 35 f/1.8 would at least compete with the Nikon 35 f/1.8S and the Canon RF 35 f/1.8 both of which are very nice lenses even though they are modestly priced. People will of course differ on whether that half stop loss in low light is something that matters for their shooting. It does for mine and it will continue to do so even with the next higher MP sensors, but YMMV and it seems it likely does....Show more →
I remember people saying the same things about the 36mp R. And interestingly Sony gave us more MP and better performance. We will see though. Either way the performance of these sensors is so good now the splitting hair thing is getting silly. I'd still rather carry 1 lens vs 2.
Jul 01, 2019 at 08:12 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I remember people saying the same things about the 36mp R. And interestingly Sony gave us more MP and better performance. We will see though. Either way the performance of these sensors is so good now the splitting hair thing is getting silly. I'd still rather carry 1 lens vs 2.
We pretty much know how the next round of higher MP sensors from Sony will perform. It is likely to be based on 3.72 micron sensor sites (going to 60 MP in FF 35mm) that we see in the 26 MP APS-C sensor from Sony and the 100 MP 44 X 33 sensor that Sony makes that recently came out in the Fuji GFX 100. We will get more resolution with this sensor and it should be a great sensor, but we shouldn't expect much improvement in high ISO capability. Increasing resolution typically does not lead to higher ISO capability. The A7r to the A7r II saw the introduction of a new technology the Aptina-DRX that allowed each pixel to function differently at base ISO and at higher ISOs. That change is what gave us the gain in high ISO performance in that development of sensors. Note that there was little increase in DR at base ISO from the A7r to A7r II. There doesn't appear to be anything on the horizon like the Aptina-DRX so I certainly do not expect much of an increase in high ISO performance in the new higher resolution sensors, but then one never knows for sure how a new sensor will perform.
Steve Spencer wrote:
We pretty much know how the next round of higher MP sensors from Sony will perform. It is likely to be based on 3.72 micron sensor (going 60 MP in FF 35mm) that we see in the 26 MP APS-C sensor from Sony and the 100 MP 44 X 33 sensor that Sony makes that recently came out in the Fuji GFX 100. We will get more resolution with this sensor and it should be a great sensor, but we shouldn't expect much improvement in high ISO capability. Increasing resolution typically does not lead to higher ISO capability.
Like I said. I remember hearing the same thing before In the end It doesn't matter, the high ISO capability is already great.
Jul 01, 2019 at 08:21 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nhsonyshooter wrote:
Like I said. I remember hearing the same thing before In the end It doesn't matter, the high ISO capability is already great.
See my detailed comments above (I edited my original post), and it does matter to me as for exactly the type of shooting I want to use this lens for I could really use better high ISO capability. Shooting family stuff indoors (e.g., a birthday party with a cake illuminated with candles) I would really like better high ISO. That is why the better high ISO capability really matters to me and part of the reason I would definitely prefer a 35 f/1.8 to a cropped 24 f/1.4. YMMV, and probably does.
Steve Spencer wrote:
See my detailed comments above (I edited my original post), and it does matter to me as for exactly the type of shooting I want to use this lens for I could really use better high ISO capability. Shooting family stuff indoors (e.g., a birthday party with a cake illuminated with candles) I would really like better high ISO. That is why the better high ISO capability really matters to me and part of the reason I would definitely prefer a 35 f/1.8 to a cropped 24 f/1.4. YMMV, and probably does.
Just out of curiosity, how much difference do you "really" think there is going to be between this 35 f1.8 and say Batis 40mm? Obviously besides the focal length
Jul 01, 2019 at 08:33 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
nhsonyshooter wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how much difference do you "really" think there is going to be between this 35 f1.8 and say Batis 40mm? Obviously besides the focal length
A really good question. I expect the Batis to be better up close as that is a primary consideration in the design of that lens. The Batis will probably have a bit better contrast too, but the 35 f/1.8 will have that extra third of a stop wider aperture and will almost certainly be smaller if not lighter. I see the situation to be a bit like the FE 85 f/1.8 vs. Batis 85 f/1.8. I think on balance the Batis is a bit better lens, but it is bigger physically and costs a lot more than the FE 85 f/1.8. I expect a similar but not exactly the same situation between the FE 35 f/1.8 and the Batis 40 f/2. I do have pretty strong hopes that the FE 35 f/1.8 will be of similar quality to the FE 85 f/1.8 because mirrorless makes it easier to design a good 35 as Nikon and Canon have shown with their recent mirrorless 35s.
And ideally have AF/MF switches. I think the close focusing capabilities will be limited, but hopefully better than the 35 2.8. If the price/performance ratio is similar to the 85 1.8 I'd be happy. I'm holding off on getting a Batis 40 for that reason.
chez wrote:
Have you tried the 35 2.8? I know it's not an f2, but it sure is light and delivers great image quality. I too would like a light 35 1.8...but the 35 2.8 has been a fabulous substitute for me...and I doubt I'd ever sell it as there is nothing out there that delivers the size, weight, AF and image quality in one package.
Ha, I have indeed tried the 35/2.8...3 times. I sold copy #3 about 6 months ago...with the expectation that copy #4 is a possibility in the future. It has, IMO, underrated image quality, sharp edge to edge from, essentially, f/2.8. It's very small and renders quite well. But, and this is the big but, I really miss the extra stop. I didn't think I would so I bought one with my original A7, a camera I financed by selling my RX1. I mean, there's a lot at work in the comparison of the two, but I realized that 35mm is one focal length where I really use the speed for subject isolation and I missed it. When I bought the Sigma 35A for my Nikon my Sony 35 almost never came out of the bag...despite the fact that the D810/35A combo was a monster. Sold. Then had a trip to visit the in-laws in Mexico and planned a photo stop for a week in Mexico City...rebought. Used it as my only lens, really enjoyed it, though still felt something was missing. Sold...then rebought...then sold to pick up a 24GM...which I also sold as the whole 'crop 24' didn't work for me. Argh.
So, yes, I have tried the 35/2.8, have alternately loved it and been frustrated by it...missing a stop that I actually use...I also find the 0.35m MFD too distant. But...it may join my kit once again now that I've sold all my Nikon stuff and I'm not splitting my time and dollars on two separate kits. It's a very useful tool and one that I'll appreciate more if it's not my only option in the range.
Steve Spencer wrote:
A really good question. I expect the Batis to be better up close as that is a primary consideration in the design of that lens. The Batis will probably have a bit better contrast too, but the 35 f/1.8 will have that extra third of a stop wider aperture and will almost certainly be smaller if not lighter. I see the situation to be a bit like the FE 85 f/1.8 vs. Batis 85 f/1.8. I think on balance the Batis is a bit better lens, but it is bigger physically and costs a lot more than the FE 85 f/1.8. I expect a similar but not exactly the same situation between the FE 35 f/1.8 and the Batis 40 f/2. I do have pretty strong hopes that the FE 35 f/1.8 will be of similar quality to the FE 85 f/1.8 because mirrorless makes it easier to design a good 35 as Nikon and Canon have shown with their recent mirrorless 35s....Show more →
I agree with you Steve. And that is why I returned my new Batis 40mm today, 8 days before the 30 day return period was up. I hope the new 35mm f1.8 has the IQ that my ZA55 f1.8 and FE85mm f1.8 lenses have and I will be very happy, plus most likely pocket $$$. The Batis 40 was very nice, no issues with it at all, but after trying the 40mm for a few weeks in an effort to replace my ZA35 f2.8 and 55, I decided that I want the 35 and 55mm option instead.
Steve Spencer wrote:
A really good question. I expect the Batis to be better up close as that is a primary consideration in the design of that lens. The Batis will probably have a bit better contrast too, but the 35 f/1.8 will have that extra third of a stop wider aperture and will almost certainly be smaller if not lighter. I see the situation to be a bit like the FE 85 f/1.8 vs. Batis 85 f/1.8. I think on balance the Batis is a bit better lens, but it is bigger physically and costs a lot more than the FE 85 f/1.8. I expect a similar but not exactly the same situation between the FE 35 f/1.8 and the Batis 40 f/2. I do have pretty strong hopes that the FE 35 f/1.8 will be of similar quality to the FE 85 f/1.8 because mirrorless makes it easier to design a good 35 as Nikon and Canon have shown with their recent mirrorless 35s....Show more →
An educated guess: FE 35mm/1.8 will have different kind of rendering than Batis 40mm. FE 85mm/1.8 is sharp and technically good but Zeiss has always more character. Probably FE will also be smaller.
tuomkok wrote:
An educated guess: FE 35mm/1.8 will have different kind of rendering than Batis 40mm. FE 85mm/1.8 is sharp and technically good but Zeiss has always more character. Probably FE will also be smaller.
I hope the new 35/1.8 won't have the Batis 40/2's rendering harshness when shooting at mid-distance.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I hope the new 35/1.8 won't have the Batis 40/2's rendering harshness when shooting at mid-distance.
The 40's rendering is probably inimitable
Now in all seriousness, I doubt that bokeh would be a priority for a 35mm f/1.8 design. Most likely it will be a "great for infinity shots at f/8" affair. Which is fine with me at this focal length.
For bokeh I think we have to wait for the Sigma 35/1.2.
Your all going to laugh but until all this shakes out. I’m returning my Rokinon 45 when I get to Adorama and one of my Profoto A1x units and grab a B10 unit more power but in the meantime I said screw it grabbed the Sigma 35 1.4 Sony mount for like 649 on sale. I need a 3 shooter kit next week so why not the Sigma . At that price it’s worth trying again. Than will see what everyone’s got but until than to me it’s the same old bullshit. Hurry up and wait than get disappointed again. I’ll play with my lights for awhile and sit this whole thing out. Seriously it’s Horton really boring waiting for someone to actually make a high quality 35.
Btw this is still a rumor so are the Sigma announcement. I make no money off rumors
